Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Stierlitz.Dango

Contributing Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Stierlitz.Dango

  1. On 12/7/2018 at 5:15 AM, Peasant said:

    My mistake. I forget to write frontal.

    I mean frontal, yes, but even frontal arc, Chinese design seems unsuited! Armor array is designed in such a way that either the interior is awful or the weakness is exposed in the frontal 60* arc.

     

    I realize Russian design is only frontal 60*, NATO include the sides, but China does not. Frontal array is thick but does not cover wider aspect. Like Russian/Soviet & NATO.

    Thanks for kindness

    3

    you realize Russian design is *ONLY* frontal 60*,and NATO somehow with that thin plate count as" include the sides"?!?!?

    now have you realize you are deadly WRONG?!

    fsUVtMt.jpg

    most almost all of the NATO tank who are only able to maintains protection of the frontal 30 degree cause the stupid manual loader eats extra steel and with the autoloader put in hull as the russian did they don't need that thin plate to protect the none exist loader for god sake.

    and the fact the frontal 60 degree maintains equal level of high protection(breech area doesn't count) and dramatically less weight is ABSOLUTELY FUCKING AMAZING

    DZEgl40.jpgTHIS

    IS DRAWN IN SOME JAPANESE ANIME BOOKS

    we've been posting this years and years and you know what

    I FUCKING GIVE UP

    nik39sP.jpg

     

     

     

     

  2. Fuel Cell composite armor is believable....

    And talk about fuel cell armor,i've heard an interesting design. Few years ago Chinese enginner has built a special fuel cell composite armor which uses Oplot-M ‘s design as reference.

    1Y0g7wH.png

    With the similar principle, filling diesel in the cell wall structure actually worked like an ERA and successfully weakened a HEAT testing warhead which capable of penetrating 280mm to 160mm by only 20mm thick of fuel cell armor.

    8QO0HpN.jpg

    rLbchQG.png

    TmD3LMC.jpg

  3. 4 hours ago, Laviduce said:

    Guys do think this diagram  is still a  legitimate estimate of the location of the turret composite modules of the Type 90 MBT:

     

    Talk about Type90, i got some information from Chinese document which mention about the armor composite used on Type88 which is the prototype for Type90 recently. Not sure the exact truth but i would like to share.

    fULE9sy.png

    “Japanese Type88 tank's turret and hull composite armor were trying to use different ceramic material (Alumina、Silicon oxide or Silicon carbide ceramic cut in rectangle or hexagon),each layer using binder to bonded together. The protection of this armor can reach up equal to 400mm thick of armour steel (BK) and is capable of defeat 120mm high density KE projectile (muzzle velocity>1600m/s) fired from 200meters at 0 degree, and also capable to protect against the 120mm HEAT shell which capable of penetrating 600mm of armor.  Besides, there are many of different type of armor plate, the use of ceramic material and it's ability of protection giving the armor research development a new direction”

     

    IZULarS.jpg

    image10  Type88 tank's spaced (composite) armor structure.

    陶瓷板=Ceramic plate    毫米=mm

     

    Other than this,japan seems are developing some kind of Kevlar composite

    tD2JKM2.png

    It says:"Japan is currently develop a Kevlar fiber with Titanium alloy or aluminum structured multi-layer composite armor "

     

    Of course those are just for the prototype of type90, but we can try guessing the armor from this 

     

    source:

    <<间隔(复合)装甲——现代坦克的主要装甲结构>>(1982)      (Composite armor--the main structure of the armor for modern MBT) (1982)

    <<国外复合装甲中非金属材料的应用和研究概况>>(1983)      (Summarize of the use and research of non-metallic material in foreign composite armor)(1983)

     

    ft. Akula_941

×
×
  • Create New...